John Perry (Sligo-Leitrim, Fine Gael)

The Minister received a brief on 3 December and did not read it. The Minister of State, Deputy Tim O'Malley, saw its significance. Does the Minister regret not having read that brief in light of the huge impact it had? I am totally shocked at the replies we have heard today with regard to what was known. If the Minister did not know, why was that the case? Was it necessary to get legal advice on something that was so apparent to the Ombudsman from January 2001? Why can the Minister not state it clearly? Continuing liability was discussed when medical cards for over-70s were being introduced. I do not believe what I am hearing. This was known in the Department and I am astonished that the Minister can stand here and state clearly that he did not know. When he got a brief in December 2003, he did not read it. Why was that?

See this speech in context